OT: Is Picaxe still useful if there's ChipKit/Arduino/Other options?

[rs2845]

Hi everyone,


First and foremost- I don't want to start any arguments nor am I endorsing any products. I am an end user of Picaxe.


In a lot of threads I've read about the limitations of what Picaxe can do, ultimately due to the firmware or the physical limitations of the hardware. For example running hi-speed code, using special LEDs (ie ws2812) etc. Perhaps there's workarounds but it's not always the case.


I've just received some PIC32 chips and have found that I can put the ChipKit Arduino firmware into them. Seemingly, I am now able to benefit from higher clock speeds, larger amounts of memory and more diverse projects published online.


My question is, how/why is Picaxe still useful if I can get (albeit a small number of) PIC32 chips for free and put the open firmware into them, ultimately providing more power and having greater cost efficiency with being able to update them when new features are released?


People might say that Picaxe is more "friendly" to people starting out with electronic development, but every time I look at specific components or completed projects online there's more commonly a reference to Arduino source code and frequently updated libraries- ready for use. So surely this is more friendly to those people?


I'm curious to hear people's thoughts..

 

[srnet]

This is really not the place to be critical of the alternatives to the PICAXE platform, so I wont.

First, you do need to appreciate that there is no one micro platform that will do all applications well and there are some applications that the PICAXE does very well indeed, its popular for good reasons.

Second, as a general note paraphrasing a common saying; the grass on the other side of the fence is very often not as green as you might think.

 

[hippy]

PICAXE is still useful to those people who find it useful. In most cases what limitations there are will not matter or affect people using a PICAXE.

It is a bit like asking how or why a bicycle is still useful now we have cars and other means of transportation.

 

[tony_g]

if you have a small project to get a working proto done then its quicker with a picaxe.

im using raw pics now but still have a collection of and use various picaxe, its alot quicker to get something small done without having to do the song and dance of setting up appropriate registers,peripherals ect.

so even though i have progressed onwards in terms of microcontrollers (thanks to picaxe as a code/circuit noob) i still find that even now they are still very much usefull for some of my needs and wont be in a hurry to dismiss them.


tony

 

[premelec]

Yep they are 'easy' to use and there's this excellent forum to help when your project presents mysteries to be solved... ;-0

 

[BESQUEUT]

if you have a small project to get a working proto done then its quicker with a picaxe.

im using raw pics now but still have a collection of and use various picaxe, its alot quicker to get something small done without having to do the song and dance of setting up appropriate registers,peripherals ect.

so even though i have progressed onwards in terms of microcontrollers (thanks to picaxe as a code/circuit noob) i still find that even now they are still very much usefull for some of my needs and wont be in a hurry to dismiss them.


tony

+1
I am using ATMEL AVR when I need it, but PICAXEs everytimes if it's possible.

 

[Circuit]

I think that the greatest strength of the PICAXE system is the superbly-authored PICAXE Editor 6. I simply have not found an alternative that allows code to be written and then tested in the simulator in anything like as efficient a manner. From a learning viewpoint this pretty much has no competition. Yes, if you are competent in C and have Microchip PIC programmers etc., you can of course generate more efficient code on higher performance chips. If, however, you are starting out in PICs or perhaps also if you have a lot of experience and you recognise the speed with which a PICAXE can be programmed, up and running, then you will appreciate the beauty that is the PICAXE editor.

I started off with PICAXE and now handle 32bit PICs on other systems; but for speed and simplicity of getting code written, tested in the simulator, verified and downloaded there is little to challenge the elegance of PICAXE Editor 6.

 

[mikeyBoo]

hi folks,
As a guy who is old to computers (went through puberty on DEC PDPs) but fairly new to Picaxe,
here's my opinion (please respect my opinion, no matter how stupid you think it is):

What's IMHO Good about Picaxe:
Nice editor with useful directives and symbolic assignment.
Use Picaxes like little PLCs because you can easily work with individual IO bits.
The hardware is easy to implement: A regulator & a Picaxe (with a few discrete pieces) & you're ready to rock.
I2C to make adding IO easy.
Great for small control or measurement projects.
Most importantly: Fun to play with.

What's IMHO Bad About Picaxe:
No shareable code libraries (reusable procedures):
Why? No agreed-upon format. Picaxe does not have local variables (vars that exist only within subroutines).
This means all registers are global (available to all).
This makes code sharing a source of rectal discomfort.

No standard connectors for hardware. Shields are IMHO a bad idea on Arduino or Picaxe.

Now, the reusable code issue was easy to solve (but now I'm a Picaxe Lone Ranger).
Ditto for a "standard" (albeit only for my buddy & I) connector.

Coming from the "Computer Language STASI" world where:
: if {$timeSpent == $desiredProfit} {
: gosub IeatSteak
: } else {
: gosub IeatBeans
: }

The Picaxe "code library" could be a reality if enough folks are willing to agree on a format.
Ditto for a "standard" connector.

But that's just my opinion (and you know what they say about opinions).

 

[buzzlightyear]

I think it is a good question, and I think it is one with many answers, here is my take on it.

Picaxe is easier and more fun, the user forum is more helpful, I find the 08m2 in particular to be an amazing little chip that most of the time is all I need. I have done some arduino projects prior to discovering picaxe but it was nowhere near as simple or enjoyable, I would not rule out using either platform again and I will probably try some others too, I do feel that some of the things that I want to do are not very well suited to picaxe, so I will most likely use an arduino in those cases, but other than that picaxe is my first choice.

I should add that most of my projects are not mainstream stuff like robots or those type of "project for the sake of it" projects, I have specific requirements that often have not been made by anyone before, so the large codebase and libraries of arduino are not much use to me, most of the time.

 

[BESQUEUT]

The Picaxe "code library" could be a reality if enough folks are willing to agree on a format.
Ditto for a "standard" connector.

It's easy to write sharable code using PUSH and POP commands to pass parameters.
Temporary variables have to be declared with SYMBOL so they can be relocated where you want.

But most of the time, programs are so simples that they can be rewrited in your own context.

 

[erco]

Cheap, simple, educational, lots of functions, no programmer required, multitasking, good sized user base, support, forums, how many reasons do you need?

There is a never-ending supply of noobs just starting out, Picaxe is great for them to learn. If they stick with it they may move to a faster/better chip with more capability. But not everyone needs to. These days, blinking an LED and wiggling a servo are black magic to most people, and the 08M2 (the most popular chip) does that very well.

Horses for courses.